| About us | News | Events | Campaigns | Links | |||
Godalming Cycle Campaign members have worked with Waverley Cycling Forum, East Hampshire Cyclists' Forum, the CTC, Friends of the Earth, Sustrans and cycling experts to propose a raft of changes to the Highways Agency's plans for the A3 at Hindhead in Surrey. The major part of these plans is to route all cycles over a shared use bridleway over Hindhead Common and bury the existing A3 road. We also made a set of detailed comments on the area immediately to the south of this.
The Public Inquiry opened on 7 September 2004 and an early statement was invited from the Cycling Forum. It finally closed on 15 February 2005, and the report was made public on 20 July 2006. The ministers' decsion was finally released on 27 October 2006. And the result? It's still difficult to believe, but the inspector discounted ALL the cycle issues raised at the inquiry, and the ministers simply followed his recommendations. The iniquity of this series of decisions, and their patent short-sightedness when viewed from an environmental angle, still beggars understanding.
For a summary of the cycle case, have a look at this statement. (Also available as a pdf file).
The full report (pdf 1.3MB) is a little interesting in parts, if you have the time. For a quick look, try using your pdf file reader search facility to look for the characters 'cycl', which will find cycle and cycling references.
Work is starting on the Hindhead tunnel for the A3 London - Portsmouth road. The tunnel will have no access for non-motorised transport, and the scheme cost is £371 million at current prices. By contrast, the hospital in Guilford nearby is threatened with closure for want of £70 million. The plan calls for the existing A3 to be buried, and the existing byway widened slightly to cope with horses, cycles, off-road vehicles and pedestrians. The decisions preceded the Stern report on climate change; one hopes that this might pose a watershed for such paucity of decision making, but there seems to be no evidence of this in government thinking.
The public inquiry system is a bit of a quasi-judicial process where proponents and objectors have to write down a detailed case, called a Proof of Evidence. This (or a summary) is read out in the inquiry and its author is then available for cross examination by anyone present - including the barristers that some parties employ. Tough stuff if you're used to just writing the odd bit for a cycle newsletter.
There are several proofs for the cycle case, all taking slightly different angles but all broadly agreeing on the same points. They're worth a read as they are full of detail and have taken a great deal of volunteer time to research and write. They set the background, describe the situation, propose solutions and don't hold back from being critical, particuarly of the Highways Agency. You will need a couple of mugs of very strong coffee...
This is a picture taken before 1889, when the Sailor's Stone in the foreground was moved further up the hill.
The Public Inquiry also has a website, which is full of fascinating stuff like daily transcripts, all the Highway Agency evidence, the running order, and an interesting list of documents if you're into road schemes.
Our web page on the 2005 Campaigns Conference also has some material about the Hindhead situation.
| About us | News | Events | Campaigns | Links | |||
Page last updated 15 March 2007 by Webmaster.